"I received this email in reference to the Two full frame Sony DSLRs this summer post, it’s an interesting read:

“The table with the future release of 10 Sony DSLR’s is correct. The 200-350 were just interim models. People thought that A200 was A100 replacement. It was not. The 500 series will be. 230-380 are just interim models too, until Sony works out perfect video function on the DSLR. Sony does not care what Canon is doing. They need to implement the proper video function because of Red. Sony basically owned the digital cinema market segment. 99% of the studio digital production was all Sony. Then came Red that is pushing inexpensive products to the independents. The real advantage Red has are 35 mm sensors, which give more artistic DOF. Red was going to bring out Scarlet. Sony basically killed that project with XDCAM EX1 and EX3 cameras. Red had to go back to the drawing boards. XDCAM is basically the world/wide broadcast standard. Sony more or less owns the broadcast segment too. Red cameras so far were not performing that well, but as new generation is planned, Sony needs to kill it with cheaper, better performing DSLRs with HD video function. Canon is not threat to Sony. Red is. Sony pro video division is extremely successful and reliable. No one was able to make any serious inroads against Sony in that area. Panasonic once did try with their M2 format, but Sony immediately counteracted with better Betacam (not the same as Beta). Panasonic M2 format became quickly history. Network executives who bought to the Panasonic format were fired. The saying in the industry since than is: “You can’t get fired for buying Sony.” One of the reasons is naturally Sony’s reliability. What is interesting is that Red has 35 mm sensor with claimed 8 MP resolution, but Sony EX1 (and 3) only claim 2 MP resolution and have the same measured resolution and better low light performance as the Red, despite using 1/2″ CMOS sensors. Sony’s strength is in its world’s foremost sensor expertise and from its expertise in miniaturization, which is also known to be world’s best.

One of the reasons Sony calls the 3 new cameras entry level is because they were designed that way, with a small viewfinder. The previous 3 models were bigger with slightly more features, because they needed to bridge the gap of missing 500 series. Sony said that they wanted 5 cameras. They had it. Now that 500, 800, and 1000 series will come out, the lineup will be complete - 10 cameras. Check the fact that most of Sony’s effort goes to FF lenses. That is because Sony plans on having 3 FF bodies with high quality Zeiss and G lenses. You can publish this too.

Sony needs DSLR products, because of the coming merge of the video and still functions into a new way of photography that will be so revolutionary as switch from film to digital, or going from B/W to color. Another reason they need it, is because they need the pro image to sell their P&S cameras.

Sony does aim for the No.1 spot in the DSLR market. This fuels the drive within the DSLR design team. The DSLR’s that Sony brought out so far are just little imperfect preludes to what will come, in conjunction with Carl Zeiss lenses.

Sony wants the Pro market and believes that it will make major inroads with the new super video/still DSLR cameras - starting with A1000.

True or not, Sony needs to clarify their intentions at some point, either through words or action. Buying into a format is an investment (even if you're an amateur), and if the vendors direction is contradictory to your own, then it won't make sense.

I thought that the A900 was a strong sign that Sony was trying to make inroads into the traditional DSLR market by offering a superb camera at an excellent price. But, as time drags on, I'm not so certain anymore (about their strategy).

I'm personally happy with what Sony has to offer at the moment, and I think Sony should actually continue to focus on providing feature rich cameras that are inexpensive and straight forward (that might be a strategy, but who knows what their up to!). Sony may take a whole new slant to the problem, of which, some may not like, i.e. The new cameras may not be what people expect them to be.

I do anticipate a new camera soon, and that might be my second Sony (if not, I'll be getting an A200 in October as a backup). Don't care much about the video thing, but I guess its another feature to add to the box to help with sales.

The main intention of the a900 is to rise above the similar competition, above olympus and pentax. It creates a statement that Sony is far more advanced in the market by having a FF in it's line.

I'm surprised how much I rely on steadyshot. It makes me wonder how Canikon users without IS can even begin to shoot low light.I wouldn't be thinking of switching from Sony for a long while.

Steady shot is cool, but I don't get why Sony Tele lenses are not just more expensive than non-IS lenses for Canon and Nikon, but more expensive than IS teles from them. I don't see this as anything other than pure price gouging. It is one thing about Sony that kinda annoys me tbh

Steady shot is cool, but I don't get why Sony Tele lenses are not just more expensive than non-IS lenses for Canon and Nikon, but more expensive than IS teles from them. I don't see this as anything other than pure price gouging. It is one thing about Sony that kinda annoys me tbh

to what ive heard in the high class glasses (not SURE!) SSM has something to do with the price? reaching the sky?

The main intention of the a900 is to rise above the similar competition, above olympus and pentax. It creates a statement that Sony is far more advanced in the market by having a FF in it's line.

I'm surprised how much I rely on steadyshot. It makes me wonder how Canikon users without IS can even begin to shoot low light.I wouldn't be thinking of switching from Sony for a long while.

The answer is the 2-3 extra stops of clean iso which is = VR in disguise plus you can freeze object.

since i use nikon d700, i forget about IS/VR. All my lenses do not have any stabilization.

ha! you speak as if every C/N camera has 2-3 stops better ISO than any Sony camera. This is simply false. The A700 is equal in ISO performance to the D300. And, your D700 example is unfair. Obviously the D700 is going to be better at high ISOs than the A700 or A900 - it has much bigger pixels. Yes, Sony does not currently have a low-res high-speed high-ISO camera. But it's only a matter of time before they do.

If they deliver, I'll switch back. If not, who cares? Good photos do not have brands.

very true. tech will get better & better,I predict cameras will fully edit any type of photos,in the future. but to be a photographer,is hard work.

and to be honest,I believe Sony is going to get revenge on Canon,in the next years,for the market share. even Pentax is slowly moving up. and such a brand will always get support,but only take small steps,there's no money for bigger ones. the competition will be fiercer with every following year.

well a Nikon FX camera is coming soon,as the rumours state,with 20+ mp,so then a comparisson between this one,the 5D MkII and the A900 will be trully possible.

It makes me wonder how Canikon users without IS can even begin to shoot low light.

With no difficulty at all. With a ultra-wide angle lens, you can get very sharp photos even at slow shutter speeds. I get sharp photos even at 1/5s without IS. If I'm doing low-light portrait work, I'm going to be using my 24-70mm f2.8 and IS isn't going to help since I can get acceptably sharp shots at 1/60s. At those shutter speeds, subject motion is going to be much more of an issue than camera shake.

IS is useful, but in in my use that's mainly for longer telephoto lenses which I have none right now .

As I have a thumb in both pies, I can safely say that it doesn't hurt to have IS at the wide end, but like all things you can make do without. In practical experience, I suspect the focal length shutter time rule of thumb breaks down at the ultra-wide end (10mm) so IS is of very limited benefit there. But I think there is a tangible benefit to be had for regular wide angle (18mm) and longer. I still want IS on f/1.4 primes on Canon - it is a big reason I haven't totally dumped Sony yet.